CHICAGO | Wolf Point - West Tower | 493 FT | 48 FLOORS

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Again: Outcry from the architecture community led to major design revisions to the Trump Tower, and I can't think of anyone with a bigger ego than that douchebag. Anyway, I think you're confusing desires and expectations. A lot of us desire something great for Pelli's portion of the site even though, at this point, we don't really expect it.

I think it's important to recognize that Trump didn't give a whit about what the architectural community thought of his design. The revisions only happened because Daley did care, and he stepped in to make sure Trump and Smith improved the design.

It's unlikely that Daley was enforcing his personal tastes in architecture, but he was sensitive to the concerns of the architectural community, particularly on major projects, because he realized the importance of preserving Chicago as an architectural mecca. His mandates even extended to regular projects - Central Station (Daley's hood) immediately switched to a steel-and-glass aesthetic after Daley read Blair Kamin's scathing review of the early Museum Park towers.

Rahm has so far shown no signs of having the same attitude that Daley did. His appointments to the Landmarks Commission showed that he values the city's favorable relationship with the private sector more than he values enforcing good design, and he doesn't want to sully that public-private relationship with capricious design mandates.

[TallBob]

Great project Chicago! Hope it gets built sooner than later.

[rgolch]

If I recall correctly, a big part of the reason Trump tower has a spire was because Daley twisted the Donald's arm.

[Chicago_Forever]

According to this recent Q & A with Christopher Kennedy, the apartment tower will start in October.


Christopher Kennedy talks about Wolf Point plans


By: Ryan OriJune 01, 2012


Christopher Kennedy

(Crain's) — Christopher Kennedy has heard plenty of ideas on what to build at Wolf Point, but helicopters and chop suey didn't stir his imagination like the ambitious $1-billion-plus plan unveiled this week.



A venture including the Kennedy family and Hines Interests L.P. on Tuesday took the wraps off a proposed three-tower development on the 3.9-acre riverside site near the Merchandise Mart, which the political dynasty has owned for nearly seven decades.



“The Kennedys have always thought this is what would occur,” Mr. Kennedy says. “Other people have had other ideas, from a floating Chinese restaurant to a massive, revolving helipad. Stuff was coming over the fax machine with enough regularity that we wanted to unplug the thing.”


Read more: http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...#ixzz1wYU6uFAp
Stay up-to-date on Chicago real estate with our free, daily e-newsletter

[BraveNewWorld]

Originally Posted by rgolch

If I recall correctly, a big part of the reason Trump tower has a spire was because Daley twisted the Donald's arm.

Do you think Rahm will twist their arm to get a spire ?

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by BraveNewWorld

Do you think Rahm will twist their arm to get a spire ?

Can we please stop with these inane questions and dial the level of this conversation up a notch or two? Thanks in advance. . .

. . .

[headcase]

Originally Posted by Chicago_Forever

According to this recent Q & A with Christopher Kennedy, the apartment tower will start in October.

Actually, he says "he thinks" it will start in October, and goes on to say they will work with the city and neighborhood.

Any potential start date is impossible to nail down until the community meetings and planning commission are dealt with.

SSDD

[nomarandlee]

I really hope they don't add a spire to it. In fact as quasi under whelmed as I am by the results in fact I hope they make very little if any changes to the building themselves. Either accept them as is and how they were envisioned or reject them outright. I don't see foresee how getting populist politicians involved in the mundane details or architecture will do this project well.

Of course I say that and yet I think the numerous revisions that the Chicago Spire and Trump went through did end up with the best results compared to the earlier versions. I don't see that being a benefit in this case though.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I think it's important to recognize that Trump didn't give a whit about what the architectural community thought of his design. The revisions only happened because Daley did care, and he stepped in to make sure Trump and Smith improved the design.

It's unlikely that Daley was enforcing his personal tastes in architecture, but he was sensitive to the concerns of the architectural community, particularly on major projects, because he realized the importance of preserving Chicago as an architectural mecca. His mandates even extended to regular projects - Central Station (Daley's hood) immediately switched to a steel-and-glass aesthetic after Daley read Blair Kamin's scathing review of the early Museum Park towers.

Rahm has so far shown no signs of having the same attitude that Daley did. His appointments to the Landmarks Commission showed that he values the city's favorable relationship with the private sector more than he values enforcing good design, and he doesn't want to sully that public-private relationship with capricious design mandates.

Assessment, spot-on.

[spyguy]

The website is up: http://wolfpointchicago.com/

[Chicago_Forever]

Originally Posted by headcase

Actually, he says "he thinks" it will start in October, and goes on to say they will work with the city and neighborhood.

Any potential start date is impossible to nail down until the community meetings and planning commission are dealt with.

SSDD

Trust me I know, nothing is for certain until the tower actually starts to rise and even then, things aren't for certain if the economy takes another nose dive.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by jarta

There needs to be an appropriate amount of park (not just open) space at Wolf Point. Open space is mainly for those who work and live at the site. Park space is for everyone to use (doesn't matter who owns it). There is a difference.

How and why is this a good location for park space?

Perhaps I'm a Jane Jacobsian purist in my general disdain for urban "open space" and city-killing parks, but I feel 22% site coverage is hardly something to be proud of here, and it makes it even more likely (given the isolated site and limited access points) that rather than serve as a vibrant new mini-neighborhood, the development will become a collection of lifeless sculptures with a wind-swept open space that is completely dead other than weekday lunch hours.

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by BraveNewWorld

Do you think Rahm will twist their arm to get a spire ?

LOL. Pretty funny.

Wait... [somebody who isn't as ill-informed as I am] so is this just more of the same hype, or does it look like there's a realistic chance this gets built?

[Steely Dan]

^ i'd say there's a very realistic chance that phase 1 will get built. the chances for phases 2 and 3 will be far more dependent on the economy and office market in the future.

[jarta]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

How and why is this a good location for park space?

Perhaps I'm a Jane Jacobsian purist in my general disdain for urban "open space" and city-killing parks, but I feel 22% site coverage is hardly something to be proud of here, and it makes it even more likely (given the isolated site and limited access points) that rather than serve as a vibrant new mini-neighborhood, the development will become a collection of lifeless sculptures with a wind-swept open space that is completely dead other than weekday lunch hours.

Viva, Since you asked why .....

Ever since the original Burnham 1909 Plan For Chicago, Wolf Point has been designated as a potential park. The last plan for the area adopted by the Chicago Plan Commission, the 2009 Action Plan, designates the southern portion of Wolf Point as "naturalized open space.". Wolf Point was the location where Chicago commerce started. Some memory of that should be preserved - and this is the last good chance to do so.

However, something iconic also needs to be built on Wolf Point. My personal opinion is that 1 or 2 multi-use towers that reach for the sky (without drawing a curtain across the river which, when viewed from the east, gives no hint that anything in the City west or north of Wolf Point is interesting). 333 Wacker leads the eye around the confluence into the south branch. The current plan leads the eye nowhere. It's like Chicago ends at Wolf Point.

The current plan obliterates the property and the 3 buildings stand looming over the River. It does nothing to preserve the natural bank of the river. There was no attention paid to the guidelines and standards for developments that are mandatory concerning setbacks and massing of buildings along the River. IMO, the current plan will have to be refined.

[headcase]

Originally Posted by jarta

Viva, Since you asked why .....

Ever since the original Burnham 1909 Plan For Chicago, Wolf Point has been designated as a potential park. The last plan for the area adopted by the Chicago Plan Commission, the 2009 Action Plan, designates the southern portion of Wolf Point as "naturalized open space.".

Interesting, can you point to your sources? I certainly haven't seen read about those points anywhere.....

In fact, I just searched the 2009 plan referenced, and there isn't a single mention of Wolf's Point in the cities version online. There are other materials from the same time that mention it, but only as far as extending the river walk to it. Link

I know the 2003 CCAP didn't expect there to be green space at the point, infact the developer's showed a slide from the plan the other night, that BV was nice enough to post in this thread...



And the 1909 plan, well that is pretty difficult to find information from, but this particular image doesn't seem to show any green space at that location.


Linked from Wikipedia.

It does nothing to preserve the natural bank of the river.

The natural bank of the river is eroding away, preserving it in it's natural state isn't very feasible especially when having to extend the river walk.

There was no attention paid to the guidelines and standards for developments that are mandatory concerning setbacks and massing of buildings along the River. IMO, the current plan will have to be refined.

Since the architect that helped write those guidelines is involved in the project, I think they'll be ok.

SSDD

[headcase]

Originally Posted by headcase

Interesting, can you point to your sources? I certainly haven't seen read about those points anywhere.....
SSDD

Ok, a little more research allows me to dig up more information, though still nothing about the park .... LINK

In the "Urban Design" Section

Wolf Point
Wolf Point is located at the confluence of the Main, North and South Branches of the Chicago River adjacent to the Merchandise and ApparelMarts. Opportunity sites in this area also include land west of the Chicago River. This is one of the most visible development sites in downtown.
Design recommendations for this area include the following (see Figure
RN-1 at right):
Building height recommendations include utilization of Wolf Point for a signature building that is taller than buildings on adjacent parcels. A target height in the 80 -story range is recommended with an adjacent building target height in the 50-story range.
The natural character of the river- front edge on Wolf Point should
be maintained to balance and complement the hard edge char-
acter of adjacent developments. Pedestrian access via land, and potentially water, should be incorporated.

In the "Forcast, 2008-2020" Section

Plans for Wolf Point include three towers that will house 350 hotel rooms, 1,500 condominium units, 850 rental units and 1 million SF of office space. The tallest tower is envisioned to be 89 stories tall and will provide a major visual focal point at

some reformatting done, I apologetize if I chopped it up too much

SSDD

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by headcase

The natural bank of the river is eroding away, preserving it in it's natural state isn't very feasible especially when having to extend the river walk.

true.

also, the idea that the riverbank that currently exists at wolf point is "natural" is laughable. that section of the river has been so monkeyed around with by the hands of man that there is absolutely nothing "natural" about any part of the river in the downtown area (or the vast majority of the river south of the foster damn for that matter).

[Chief Blackhawk]

Originally Posted by rgolch

Well, if I'm being honest, I really don't have a philosophy. I'm certainly much less of form follows function guy, and am much more concerned with aesthetics. Not that I don't have an appreciation for some great modernist buildings that we have in Chicago, like the IBM building. But I like to see more variety in our city, and hopefully Pelli and associates will rework what we've seen to give us something special. I will admit, I certainly don't look at these buildings with the same degree of sophistication that a lot of the rest of you do. But neither will the vast majority of Chicagoans.

If you claim that you are a man of both aesthetics and honesty, I don't understand how you can find any of those structures "appealing."

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by jarta

Viva, Since you asked why .....

Ever since the original Burnham 1909 Plan For Chicago, Wolf Point has been designated as a potential park. The last plan for the area adopted by the Chicago Plan Commission, the 2009 Action Plan, designates the southern portion of Wolf Point as "naturalized open space.". Wolf Point was the location where Chicago commerce started. Some memory of that should be preserved - and this is the last good chance to do so.

This doesn't exactly answer the "why" but rather simply says that others have also said it should be a park --- Among many other criteria, urban parks are generally only successful when a mix of people encounter the park by coincidence as part of their daily lives in addition to the 'tenant' users who live and work immediately adjacent to the site. I don't see how a mini-peninsula like Wolf Point is viable as anything other than open space for the benefit and use of the tenants of the buildings built there, since almost no one else will be (1) making the trek to get there, (2) stumble upon it by accident, nor (3) take a detour from their usual path to experience the park.

Washington Square Park is an example of a successful park that benefits from both #2 and #3 above.

The "monumental" open space --- e.g. Millenium Park, a destination unto itself --- can only happen a few places in the city, and even then its accessibility and proximity to mixed activities should be far better than Wolf Point's.

Other than a riverwalk I don't see why there shouldn't be 50% site coverage here (or whatever the maximum to conform to the view guarantees of Apparel Center).